By William Atkinson, Editor - Economic Affairs
Among iconic British TV moments, it is the cultural equivalent of Del Boy falling through that bar. Kenneth Clark, looking towards Notre Dame, intoning: ‘What is Civilisation? I don’t know yet. But I think I recognise it when I see it; and I am looking at it now’. This is the introduction to the first episode of Civilisation, Clark’s magisterial televisual tour of Western cultural history. Go and watch it on Iplayer, if you can bring yourself to pay the licence fee.
As egotistical as I can be, I will not pretend that my pronouncements here at Economic Affairs will be as eloquent and informed as Clark’s views on art, architecture and philosophy. But this Substack shall take inspiration, at least, from that first episode: ‘The Skin of our Teeth’. It charts how civilisation survived the Dark Ages – Hebridean monks, battered by the Atlantic out on Iona, diligently preserving Christian teaching before its successful and triumphant return to the mainland, the Continent, and the wider world.
Embarking on Economic Affairs, I feel a little like those monks. Just as they laboured to protect the truth in an age of ignorance and spite, the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) is fighting to share the timeless lessons of liberty in harsh and unforgiving climate. We are on the verge of our most left-wing government in decades, with charlatans like Gary Stevenson touted as serious economic advisers. We have parties – supposedly on the free-market Right – committed to welfare splurges like the Triple Lock and dabbling with nationalisation. We are told that “40 years of neoliberalism” are the rout of our ills in a country in which nothing gets built, with a Soviet health service, and taxing and spending at record levels.
Against this, Economic Affairs shall stand resolute. As our Director highlighted yesterday, this Substack will be your daily one-stop-shop for all the best writing, news, podcasts and more associated with free-markets and classical liberalism. We have a stellar list of contributors lined up, ranging from political and economic titans, via various IEA legends, to a range of up-and-coming writers who I owe a pint or three. Those familiar with my work from The Spectator and ConservativeHome will know that my tastes can be eclectic, my instincts inconvenient, and my writing laced with a sense of humour. If those are tendencies you share, get in touch, and pitch away. Mi Substack es su Substack.
But for those unfamiliar with me, a brief introduction. All my adult life has been working towards Economic Affairs. From a teenage introduction to classical liberalism spurred on by reading IEA papers and blogs – a happy side effect of crushing on Kate Andrews on Question Time – to a happy few weeks at a summer school five years ago, I have since become a journalist. But I have long been inspired by that quotation on Karl Marx’s tomb in Highgate cemetery. The point is not to philosophise about the world, but to change it; taking the reins here at Economic Affairs is my chance not to idly pontificate but help lead and shape the debate over our economic future, just as the IEA has been doing for decades.
As Civilisation was subtitled, one must take my remarks on this site as a personal view. But the principles upon which Economic Affairs are both timeless and timely: that individual liberty, limited government and free enterprise are the best path to prosperity. If you agree, please add Economic Affairs to your daily reading list. And if you don’t, stick around and enjoy yourself while we try and convince you. I can promise that you won’t regret it.
What we’re reading today
What we’re reading today
Readers will have different opinions on AI. Some will see it as a triumph for human ingenuity set to liberate us to ever-greater heights of growth and prosperity. Others will view it as a menace, the Terminator-esque cuckoo in the cradle fated to doom us all. But the Bank of International Settlements – often described as the bank for central banks – fears that ‘excessive’ spending on new AI data centres is risking a financial meltdown like the credit crunch. If the bots don’t get us, the crash will…
Bad news for Javier Milei. The chief of staff of the Argentine president has been forced to resign. Manuel Adorbi was one of Milei’s closest advisers but quit on Saturday following revelations about lavish spending habits and a burgeoning property portfolio. Having been the President’s spokesperson for his twin drives to impose austerity and crackdown on corruption, this wasn’t the best of looks. Nonetheless, he denies any wrongdoing.
Across the Pond, Zohran Mamdani, New York’s self-declared socialist mayor, has taken a break from the World Cup to watch as the city’s Rent Guidelines Board has voted to freeze rents for 1 million flats in the city. The clever chaps and chapettes over at Reason have an excellent rundown of why these measures don’t work, helping tenants in the short-term but discouraging investment in rental properties and leaving fewer homes available in the longer. A familiar IEA theme…
As you may have noticed, it has been rather warm recently. This has prompted a tedious row between the sane – those of us who know our Lee Kwan Yew and think air conditioning is a jolly good thing – and the climate loonies, who seem like they think boiling is a just punishment for the ‘evil’ of the Industrial Revolution. The noble Robert Colvile put the latter in their place yesterday, while once again highlighting our national inability to build reservoirs and the folly of renationalising water.
Who will be our next Chancellor? With Andy Burnham on his way in and Rachel Reeves on her way our – we think! – the debate has settled on an intriguing binary: Ed Miliband or not Ed Miliband. Both Duncan Robinson at the Economist and Josh Glancy at the Sunday Times have written pieces explain why we may already live in Miliband’s Britain. But for moi, the best insight into how and his hinterland was written by Will Lloyd in the New Statesman in March. Worth a revisit!
"We are told that “40 years of neoliberalism” are the rout of our ills..."
They *would* be the rout of our ills, i.e., would put them to flight! But perhaps you meant "root."